2007 NFL Regular Season

[Montana Moe]

Patriots Road games: Buffalo, Baltimore, NY Giants

Home: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, NY Jets, Miami.

If Pittsburgh cannot beat them, maybe the Giants in the final week of the season? I guess it would depend if the Pats are going to go for the 16-0 record, or rest a few players for the playoff run.

Maybe Miami can rekindle some 1972 magic like in '85 when they beat the Bears who were talking 16-0?

Only one issue this season...no Danny Marino.

[Clever_Iggy]

That will be the big test for Belichick. If the Pats go 15-0 heading into their game against the Giants, does Moss, Maroney, Brady, and company sit and let the backups play?

Brady repeated says that none of this matters because it's all about the superbowl. And I know, GirlySport, that theyre motivated never to lose. But, if they had to pick, I say they sit down their studs for week 17 and look towards the playoffs.

[Sylvanfan]

Yeah, but what if the Giants are like 11-4 and guaranteed to be the first wild card team no matter what the result is....are they going to play Burress who hasn't practiced all year, Manning, and all their starters too? Most any team bound for the playoffs in the last week of the season is going to sit starters. So in a battle of Pats backups vs. Giants backups, the Pats second stringers still can win that game.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

This Adrian Peterson kid had pretty good day. 296 yards and a NFL record.

I heart Purple Jesus. If he ends up with 2,000+ yards(as he is on pace to do right now) forget about Rookie of the Year, he should be a finalist for league MVP.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Yeah, but what if the Giants are like 11-4 and guaranteed to be the first wild card team no matter what the result is....are they going to play Burress who hasn't practiced all year, Manning, and all their starters too? Most any team bound for the playoffs in the last week of the season is going to sit starters. So in a battle of Pats backups vs. Giants backups, the Pats second stringers still can win that game.

In that scenario, I agree with you.

My scenario was more if playoffs were still up in the air or if the Giants had a chance to get a first round bye or home field advantage for the first round.

Then again, if the Pats are 15-0 and they sit the starters against the Giants, that would be 2 weeks off, which might be a worry.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

I heart Purple Jesus. If he ends up with 2,000+ yards(as he is on pace to do right now) forget about Rookie of the Year, he should be a finalist for league MVP.

I think if he goes over 2000+ yards and the Vikings finish 8-8, he deserves consideration for MVP.

My concern is that they might overwork him too early for no reason. To get close to 2000 yards, he's going to have to approach 350 carries which is really hard on a RB. Look at Cadillac Williams in Tampa - lots of carries his first two seasons, and now... he might be done.

If the Vikings are smart, they work Taylor and Peterson throughout the season and really be careful with number of carries. Theyre not doing anything this season so no sense in wasting a year off of an already short career for Peterson.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Yeah, but what if the Giants are like 11-4 and guaranteed to be the first wild card team no matter what the result is....are they going to play Burress who hasn't practiced all year, Manning, and all their starters too? Most any team bound for the playoffs in the last week of the season is going to sit starters. So in a battle of Pats backups vs. Giants backups, the Pats second stringers still can win that game.

I'm going to be interested to see what sort of TV coverage this is supposed to get. It is scheduled to be shown on the NFL Network in the US, and from what I understand a significant percentage of the US population can't receive that station. A significant amount of the fan base wouldn't be able to see potential history be made.

[Sainters7]

If the Patriots are 15-0 I really doubt theyd sit their starters. Ever since "Spygate", Belichick seems to be trying to prove a point to the league this year, and I'm sure he'd love to have that 16-0 mark to do so.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

That will be the big test for Belichick. If the Pats go 15-0 heading into their game against the Giants, does Moss, Maroney, Brady, and company sit and let the backups play?

Brady repeated says that none of this matters because it's all about the superbowl. And I know, GirlySport, that theyre motivated never to lose. But, if they had to pick, I say they sit down their studs for week 17 and look towards the playoffs.

Not sure you want to sit your studs for 3 whole weeks (as you mentioned earlier) before the Quarterfinals.

I think they go for it. I wouldn't be too worried about players getting hurt if they play hard.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Not sure you want to sit your studs for 3 whole weeks (as you mentioned earlier) before the Quarterfinals. I say they play at least the first half.

That is my caveat. Sitting for that long is dangerous. Play the first half, build a 35 point lead and then sit. The only concern I have is that the Giants pass rush has been pretty good the past 6-7 weeks... more likely that Brady will take some shots.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

That is my caveat. Sitting for that long is dangerous. Play the first half, build a 35 point lead and then sit. The only concern I have is that the Giants pass rush has been pretty good the past 6-7 weeks... more likely that Brady will take some shots.

Yes Brady will get hit, he's a football player

Teams that are life and death to get into the playoffs can go full bore to the end without anyone getting hurt, why shouldn't the elite teams play to the end as well. It's very rare anyone gets hurt in these situations. I can't think of even one example.

Resting players... is this why #1 seeds keep getting knocked out?

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yes Brady will get hit, he's a football player

Teams that are life and death to get into the playoffs can go full bore to the end without anyone getting hurt, why shouldn't the elite teams play to the end as well. It's very rare anyone gets hurt in these situations. I can't think of even one example.

Resting players... is this why #1 seeds keep getting knocked out?

Well, Drew Brees had no business being in the game a couple seasons ago when he got hurt with San Diego - slightly different, but analogous.

I think #1 teams get knocked out because of parity, but you make a good point. Taking the foot off the gas peddle and coasting into the playoffs could definitely be a reason. Something I dont think Belichick is likely to do.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Well, Drew Brees had no business being in the game a couple seasons ago when he got hurt with San Diego - slightly different, but analogous.

I think #1 teams get knocked out because of parity, but you make a good point. Taking the foot off the gas peddle and coasting into the playoffs could definitely be a reason. Something I dont think Belichick is likely to do.

Parity is definitely a reason. Also in a 1 game playoff anything can happen so you have to be at the top of your game. For those are are saying that the NFC has no chance to beat either Indy or NE to win the Super Bowl, remember who NE beat to win their first Super Bowl

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Parity is definitely a reason. Also in a 1 game playoff anything can happen so you have to be at the top of your game. For those are are saying that the NFC has no chance to beat either Indy or NE to win the Super Bowl, remember who NE beat to win their first Super Bowl

True enough. St. Louis was very dominant in the regular season. I dont think anyone can say with 100% certainty that the AFC championship will be the Superbowl.

The Packers, Cowboys, Giants, Saints, and the Lions are good teams. Realistically, the Packers and Cowboys are the top two. NE took Dallas to town, so the AFC has to be heavily favored.

But...as lame as the cliche is - Any given Sunday.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I'm going to be interested to see what sort of TV coverage this is supposed to get. It is scheduled to be shown on the NFL Network in the US, and from what I understand a significant percentage of the US population can't receive that station. A significant amount of the fan base wouldn't be able to see potential history be made.

Its exactly what the NFL and the NFL Network want. Viewers will need to put pressure on their satelitte or cable provider to include the NFL Network in order to see that game. That is why the NFL Network started to broadcast prime time games last season. Starting with the first ever Thanksgiving night game.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

Its exactly what the NFL and the NFL Network want. Viewers will need to put pressure on their satelitte or cable provider to include the NFL Network in order to see that game. That is why the NFL Network started to broadcast prime time games last season. Starting with the first ever Thanksgiving night game.

But that could get ugly. The NFL Network is demanding to be put on a basic cable tier at a cost of 60 or 70 cents per month per customer. Cable networks want to put the network on their sports package:

The NFL Network wants to be placed on digital basic cable with all customers paying about 60 to 70 cents a month for it. Time Warner wants to offer the network on a surcharged sports tier available to subscribers who pay extra for it.

The network has rejected Time Warner's offer to let the network charge a fee for the games that would be passed on to customers.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...o/5276792.html

Personally, I'm with the cable company on this. Perhaps in Texas there are a majority of homes that won't mind being forced to pay for the network, but I know most people would prefer a la carte choices and able to pick the networks that they want and not be forced to pay for stations that they don't watch.

[KTown]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yes Brady will get hit, he's a football player

Teams that are life and death to get into the playoffs can go full bore to the end without anyone getting hurt, why shouldn't the elite teams play to the end as well. It's very rare anyone gets hurt in these situations. I can't think of even one example.

Resting players... is this why #1 seeds keep getting knocked out?

Last I checked #1 seeds usually end up in the finals, more often than other seeds. Resting players or not, this will not make a difference. The reason why some seeds get upset because these are all good teams in the playoffs, it has nothing to do with seeds and resting players.

It's the worst coaching decision ever to leave the #1 players in the game when the game is out of hand or you have nothing to play for.

These players play hurt all year long, giving there body a chance to heal is in the teams best interest. Also why risk injury, yah it may be low, but why risk the season on it when you don't have too?

On another note you start to develop your backup players and see which ones can step up next year and be starters because we all know in this salary cap era you can't keep every player.

I don't understand where people get there thought process from.

Now if the Patriots are 15-0 thats different because they have a shot at history.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Somebody should start a poll.

I'm stunned at the number of people who believe the Patriots will go undefeated. Stunned.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Somebody should start a poll.

I'm stunned at the number of people who believe the Patriots will go undefeated. Stunned.

Legitimately, I see them having the Steelers and the Giants in their way. The former because I think they can honestly beat them straight up and the latter because I think the Pats will put the Superbowl as a priority over 16-0.

Regardless, just because the 1972 Dolphins make such a spectical out of it, I want the Pat to go 19-0 and the Dolphins to go 0-16. Haha.

[Montana Moe]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

But that could get ugly. The NFL Network is demanding to be put on a basic cable tier at a cost of 60 or 70 cents per month per customer. Cable networks want to put the network on their sports package:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...o/5276792.html

Personally, I'm with the cable company on this. Perhaps in Texas there are a majority of homes that won't mind being forced to pay for the network, but I know most people would prefer a la carte choices and able to pick the networks that they want and not be forced to pay for stations that they don't watch.

One of the issues at hand in the States is the fact that DirecTV has exclusive rights to NFL Sunday Ticket. Ironically, the NFL Network is included in the base DirecTV package.

Cable companies are basically saying, "Why should we include your network on our base packages and take the financial hit when you will not give us access to Sunday Ticket?" The cable companies also wanted to make individual games available via pay per view.

Gregg Easterbrook, "Tuesday Morning Quarterback" on ESPN.com Page 2 had an interesting take on the percieved double standard from the NFL.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...erbrook/071030

I'm sure congress can sift through this mess and find a reasonable solution...